Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 21 Jul 2022, 9:52 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 9:52 am

Why are you such a reflexive ****?

You asked, I politely accommodated.

Now you bitch.

As I always ask

"What is EVER in it for me?"

I grew up in N. Europe...I know what it is like to eat brussel sprouts all winter because that's what you got out of greenhouses in the winter in N. Europe. How about canned potatoes? Been there, done that, hated them.

My stepfather's ancestral estate went the way of the Dodo in the 1970s because you couldn't get enough selling the product to pay the taxes. If that has a familiar ring to you, it should.

This is Reality, Sport....not the mental onanism in which you are inclined to indulge.

you bring up cases where imports are NECESSARY. 

I rail against unnecessary, needless shipping of products around the world to get to the backdoor which happens plenty.

There is profit in arranging logistics of global commodities, so like the MIC, corrupt assholes create a industrial complex around shipping for its own sake, sending a case of light bulbs 2k miles away from where they are NEEDED

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 10:07 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 10:07 am

Hey Christopher Columbus, did you find post #13?

There is a video there.. check it out

So what's your hypothesis on why union membership has decreased significantly over the decades 

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 10:11 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 10:11 am

you bring up cases where imports are NECESSARY. 

I rail against unnecessary, needless shipping of products around the world to get to the backdoor which happens plenty.

There is profit in arranging logistics of global commodities, so like the MIC, corrupt assholes create a industrial complex around shipping for its own sake, sending a case of light bulbs 2k miles away from where they are NEEDED

Let's try to stay in context.


You asked about unions and inflexibility and I offered an example.

I spent time in Brazil in the mid 90s. At the time, imports were punitively taxed, pretty much regardless of category.

If you want to see an environment in which Elites thrive, go to a country where local industries are protected.
Goods are of lousy quality, and with no pricing discipline, very expensive. People were buying EVERYTHING including shoes and clothing on installments. Local manufacturers, reaping massive margins, would rely on local markets and public financing, and take their obscene profits to the US and Europe.

Blackvegetable » 21 Jul 2022, 10:19 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 10:19 am

Let's try to stay in context.

You asked about unions and inflexibility and I offered an example.

I spent time in Brazil in the mid 90s. At the time, imports were punitively taxed, pretty much regardless of category.

If you want to see an environment in which Elites thrive, go to a country where local industries are protected.
Goods are of lousy quality, and with no pricing discipline, very expensive. People were buying EVERYTHING including shoes and clothing on installments. Local manufacturers, reaping massive margins, would rely on local markets and public financing, and take their obscene profits to the US and Europe.

I concede that local trade and protectionism has downside

Any comment on how rampant global trade and overseas shipping dumps tons of CO2 in the sky?

Warcok » 21 Jul 2022, 10:18 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 10:18 am

So what's your hypothesis on why union membership has decreased significantly over the decades

Keep Looking, you will get there Vespucci.  #13
 

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 10:26 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 10:26 am

Keep Looking, you will get there Vespucci.  #13

You're really putting all your chips behind that goofy *** YouTube cartoon to speak for you, eh?

lmao

https://youtu.be/JBudiVNsW2E

 
 

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 9:50 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 9:50 am

post #13 , Magellan

I was kind enough to humor your second unsupported assumption, that labor membership has dropped dramatically.  You're welcome

Do you trust the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics?

https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2016/unio ... s/home.htm

Union membership has declined steadily since 1983, the earliest year for which strictly comparable data are available.

The number of employed union members has declined by 2.9 million since 1983. During the same time, the number of all wage and salary workers grew from 88.3 million to 133.7 million. Consequently, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent in 1983 and declined to 11.1 percent in 2015.

ConsRule » 21 Jul 2022, 10:47 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 10:47 am

Do you trust the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics?

https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2016/unio ... s/home.htm

Union membership has declined steadily since 1983, the earliest year for which strictly comparable data are available.

The number of employed union members has declined by 2.9 million since 1983. During the same time, the number of all wage and salary workers grew from 88.3 million to 133.7 million. Consequently, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent in 1983 and declined to 11.1 percent in 2015.

The decrease in union membership is commensurate with decrease in home ownership, and rise of personal bankruptcies and debt, and can be tracked on a parallel decline over time.
coincidence?

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 9:40 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 9:40 am

you are such a globalist shill.  You are good at defending the indefensible

Uh...is he?

FOS » 21 Jul 2022, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 11:24 am

Uh...is he?

Well he is suddenly bringing some impressive game to his previously tired ****

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 11:24 am

The decrease in union membership is commensurate with decrease in home ownership, and rise of personal bankruptcies and debt, and can be tracked on a parallel decline over time.
coincidence?

You were just whining about not having anything to support the claim of a decline in membership.  I provided it.  Spin it any way you wish.

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 8:02 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 8:02 am

In every country, there is a direct correlation between the prosperity and well being of the public and the percentage of workforce that is unionized.  This FACT can be shown by data upon request.

So for those who oppose unions like Skans, I must ask :  what is it about prosperity that you hate?

I personally tend to doubt that there is some causal link between unions and prosperity. If Haiti had strong unions...it would still be poor. I have no doubt. 

the real causality I would argue is European culture and homogeneity.  And unions tend to ride alongside European culture. You could say they have a very deep legacy because guilds were essentially buffed up unions (in their heyday they could even be considered stronger than princes in the holy Roman empire)

One could say there is a slight meritocracy cost to unions. Because meritocracy is not the primary purpose of a union. A unions preserves both rights and tradition (the teamsters union will probably fight against self driving trucks)

Anyway I personally do agree that unions do more good than harm so I'm not gonna countersink. I just think the issue is complicated and depends on your priorities. 

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 11:25 am

Well he is suddenly bringing some impressive game to his previously tired ****

I don't see how his post even relates to unions. If an industry has no power thanks to global trade...then neither does its unions. 

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 11:25 am

Well he is suddenly bringing some impressive game to his previously tired ****

Given that I was obliged to elaborate, do you think it might be a function of your comprehension?

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 10:26 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 10:26 am

I concede that local trade and protectionism has downside

Any comment on how rampant global trade and overseas shipping dumps tons of CO2 in the sky?

With your acknowledgement that I've been very accommodating to this point.

You struggle with recidivism

 

ConsRule » 21 Jul 2022, 10:47 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 10:47 am

Do you trust the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics?

https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2016/unio ... s/home.htm

Union membership has declined steadily since 1983, the earliest year for which strictly comparable data are available.

The number of employed union members has declined by 2.9 million since 1983. During the same time, the number of all wage and salary workers grew from 88.3 million to 133.7 million. Consequently, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent in 1983 and declined to 11.1 percent in 2015.

That is because of right to work states.
It started the race to the bottom.
Thankfully so many municipalities still enforce PLAs and Davis-Bacon

ConsRule » 21 Jul 2022, 11:30 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 11:30 am

You were just whining about not having anything to support the claim of a decline in membership.  I provided it.  Spin it any way you wish.

You provided a link that speaks to unions in the USA.  Unions in other countries are a different story.

of course unions have declined in the US since the 1970s.. union implies unity, which has dissipated in the wake of racial equality.  Diversity fails

Blackvegetable » 21 Jul 2022, 11:39 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 11:39 am

With your acknowledgement that I've been very accommodating to this point.

You struggle with recidivism

I already told FOS you’re contributions here have been somewhat impressive, now how does a global warming alarmist easily dismiss the massive tonnage of greenhouse gasses that fuel mass transport on a global scale?

SJConspirator » 21 Jul 2022, 10:26 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 10:26 am

I concede that local trade and protectionism has downside

Any comment on how rampant global trade and overseas shipping dumps tons of CO2 in the sky?

thus the fascist concept of autarky. 

Which basically observes that if you rely on a foreign nation for necessary goods then they are able to hold that fact over your head and restrict your sovereignty. 

The solution? Imperialism. Seize territory that has the resources you need. 

Thus Hitler was interested in conquering Ukraine. They had oil and farmland...exactly what Germany lacked.. 

nobody likes imperialism but it is impossible to deny that autarky is al.ost necessary for a country that wants to be sovereign. 

FOS » 21 Jul 2022, 11:36 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2022, 11:36 am

I don't see how his post even relates to unions. If an industry has no power thanks to global trade...then neither does its unions.

I assumed he had a good point that was over my head.  Maybe he bamboozled me